Systematic reviews

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram example: databases plus other methods

Example PRISMA 2020 flow diagram with a second column for studies found through websites, organisations and citation searching.

Open this example in the editorStart from scratch

Identification of studies via databases and registersIdentification of studies via other methodsRecords identified from:Databases (n = 2,662)PubMed (n = 842)Scopus (n = 1,130)Web of Science(n = 690)Records removed beforescreening:Duplicate recordsremoved (n = 905)Records marked asineligible by automationtools (n = 120)Records screened(n = 1,637)Records excluded(n = 1,511)Reports sought forretrieval (n = 126)Reports not retrieved(n = 3)Reports assessed foreligibility (n = 123)Reports excluded:Not primary research(n = 49)Wrong outcome (n = 37)Full text not in English(n = 11)Studies included in review(n = 33)Reports of includedstudies (n = 38)Records identified from:Websites (n = 14)Organisations (n = 6)Citation searching(n = 27)Reports sought forretrieval (n = 47)Reports not retrieved(n = 2)Reports assessed foreligibility (n = 45)Reports excluded:Wrong outcome (n = 21)Duplicate data (n = 12)From: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/IdentificationScreeningIncluded
PRISMA 2020 flow diagram with a separate column for other identification methods. Illustrative data.

About this example

When studies are also identified through websites, organisations, citation searching or contacting authors, PRISMA 2020 adds a second column. Those records skip title/abstract screening and go straight to retrieval and eligibility assessment.

Both columns join in the “included studies” box, so the number of included reports is the sum of the two paths. This example also shows records removed by automation tools before screening.

The data

Review typeNew review
DatabasesPubMed (842), Scopus (1,130), Web of Science (690)
Duplicates removed905
Removed by automation tools120
Records excluded at screening1511
Reports not retrieved3
Reports excluded (reasons)Not primary research (49), Wrong outcome (37), Full text not in English (11)
Other methodsWebsites (14), Organisations (6), Citation searching (27)
Other methods: reports excludedWrong outcome (21), Duplicate data (12)
Studies included33

The remaining numbers are calculated automatically in the editor. Open the example, replace the data with your own, and export the figure as SVG, PDF or a 600 dpi PNG.

More examples